Tactical Tomahawk

[seruriermarshal]

Raytheon tests new guidance system for Tomahawk cruise missile

Flight test is key milestone on Tomahawk modernization path

TUCSON, Ariz., April 28, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) successfully completed a passive seeker test designed for a Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile using company-funded independent research and development investment. The captive flight test, using a modified Tomahawk Block IV missile nose cone, demonstrated that Raytheon's advanced, next-generation; multi-function processor can enable the cruise missile to navigate to and track moving targets emitting radio frequency signals.

For the test, the nosecone of a Tomahawk Block IV missile was equipped with passive antennas integrated with Raytheon's new modular, multi-mode processor, and fitted to a T-39 aircraft. Flying at subsonic speed and at varying altitudes, the aircraft simulated a Tomahawk flight regime. The passive seeker and multi-function processor successfully received numerous electronic signals from tactical targets in a complex, high density electromagnetic environment.

"Completion of this test is a significant milestone in Raytheon's effort to quickly and affordably modernize this already advanced weapon for naval warfighters," said Mike Jarrett, Raytheon Air Warfare Systems vice president. "We have assessed our company-funded multi-mission processor at Technical Readiness Level 6, enabling it to move to the engineering, manufacturing and development phase. Besides Tomahawk, the processor could be used in other sophisticated weapon systems."

A Raytheon-funded active seeker test with the company's new processor inside a Tomahawk nosecone is planned for early next year. That event will demonstrate the processor's ability to broadcast active radar as well as passively receive target electromagnetic information – a critical step in enabling the missile to strike moving targets on land and at sea.

About Tomahawk Block IV
With a range of approximately 1,000 statute miles, the Tomahawk Block IV missile is a surface- and submarine-launched precision strike stand-off weapon. Tomahawk is designed for long-range precision strike missions against high-value and heavily defended targets. More than 2,000 Tomahawks have been employed in combat. More than 500 Tomahawk flight and production validation tests have been completed. The missile is integrated on all major U.S. surface combatants, as well as U.S. and U.K. sub-surface platforms, including the Los Angeles, Virginia, Ohio, Astute and Trafalgar class submarines.

http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2555

 

[TomS]

This bit is interesting:

A Raytheon-funded active seeker test with the company's new processor inside a
Tomahawk nosecone is planned for early next year. That event will demonstrate
the processor's ability to broadcast active radar as well as passively receive
target electromagnetic information – a critical step in enabling the missile to
strike moving targets on land and at sea.

Looks like the return of the Tomahawk Multi-Mode Missile. Given that it would be used for both land and sea targets, the seeker is presumable millimeter-wave radar for imaging. (Back in the late 90s, TMMM was supposed to use either IIR or MMW radar. Looks like IIR lost out.)

 

[fredymac]

Come for the VLS launch, stay for the pigeon knockdown.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgv5ixxgTsQ&feature=player_embedded


I wonder what the target location update rate is? Must be fractional seconds to go after a ship.

 

[GJ33]

Why use a long distance / range Tomahawk if your tgt must be in radar range?
Maybe in range of a Stealth UAV?

 

[fredymac]

I'm sure there is some official explanation but just consider all the submarines equipped with Tomahawks and being able to lob them at targets based on 3rd party GPS information and then having terminal guidance through something like an E-2D or Triton which could still be 100 miles away from the target.
Putting a radio onboard with some software to update the GPS target location is also probably a lot cheaper than installing a full up seeker head which would be wasted on fixed targets. It just makes the Tomahawk more versatile at a relatively low price and allows a host of existing assets to join in the game should they be called.
Or maybe they're just playing around to see if it would work. Bureaucrats are inscrutable like that.

 

[fredymac]

It took a little hunting but I found a video of a JDAM drop on a decommisioned navy ship. I think (not sure) that this was the same principle: the JDAM GPS coordinates were updated in realtime. I think this test was part of the air-sea battle doctrine leveraging Air Force assets for naval strikes. It is the same principle of taking existing inventory and making it useful for a different mission at a relatively low cost.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcIi71kJFGI

 

[stealthflanker]

Any possibility of "resurrecting" the TASM ? By giving radar seeker to tactical tomahawk.

 

[TomS]

Raytheon is working on it:

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/surface-navy-assn/2015/01/13/raytheon-working-on-tomahawk-with-active-seeker/21718359/

But there's probably not a lot of future there. The Navy has already picked a JASSM derivative for its interim long range antiship missile.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/block-iv-xgm-109-tomahawk-chopped-07423/

 

[Jemiba]

Just a question: On this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TcFmqVkUuo ,

at 15 to 16 seconds a secondary explosion can be seen. What could be the
cause on what probably is just an empty hulk ?

 

[fredymac]

Just a question: On this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TcFmqVkUuo ,

at 15 to 16 seconds a secondary explosion can be seen. What could be the
cause on what probably is just an empty hulk ?

In the first video you can hear voices talking about multiple "units". I think they were "talking around" using the word "bomb". I would guess getting hit by a 2000lb JDAM would be similar to taking a 16 inch battleship shell. The picture below is from the Naval Yard museum in Washington and shows the result of a 16 inch shell impacting a 26 inch thick steel armor plate. That's just the penetration energy of a hardened steel tip at the front end of a 2700 pound projectile. I'm not sure how the terminal velocity compares to an air drop from 20,000 ft.

 

[Bill Walker]

I think the first white cloud is dust, paint chips, and maybe water raised by the kinetic energy of the impact. The orange flash immediately after this is the warhead on the bomb (or whatever) detonating.

 

[sferrin]

In the first video you can hear voices talking about multiple "units". I think they were "talking around" using the word "bomb". I would guess getting hit by a 2000lb JDAM would be similar to taking a 16 inch battleship shell. The picture below is from the Naval Yard museum in Washington and shows the result of a 16 inch shell impacting a 26 inch thick steel armor plate. That's just the penetration energy of a hardened steel tip at the front end of a 2700 pound projectile. I'm not sure how the terminal velocity compares to an air drop from 20,000 ft.

I'd be amazed if even a BLU-109 could do that.

 

[Jemiba]

In the first video you can hear voices talking about multiple "units". I think they were "talking around" using the word "bomb". ...

I think the first white cloud is dust, paint chips, and maybe water raised by the kinetic energy of the impact. The orange flash immediately after this is the warhead on the bomb (or whatever) detonating.

That would/could mean, the first cloud and the first flash (there is one, I think) stems from the missile itself,
its remaining fuel probably exploding on impact and then the warhead explodes considerable time later and
at a quite different location from the impact. Looks, as the ship was hit from the bow end then.

 

[seruriermarshal]

TUCSON, Ariz., Jan. 13, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) completed a successful captive flight test of a seeker designed for the Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile. The seeker will enable Tomahawk to engage moving targets on land and at sea.
Raytheon Company completed a successful captive flight test of a seeker designed for the Tomahawk Block IV cruise missile. The seeker will enable Tomahawk to engage moving targets on land and at sea.

Using company-funded, independent research and development, the test was conducted with a modified Tomahawk missile nose cone mounted on a T-39 test aircraft and equipped with a seeker integrated with Raytheon's new, modular, multi-mode processor. Over a three-week period, the aircraft flew profiles that simulated the Tomahawk flight regime, aiming at moving targets on land and in the maritime environment.

"Tomahawk is evolving to meet the U.S. Navy's need to add offensive punch and expand the overall power of the fleet worldwide," said Mike Jarrett, Raytheon Air Warfare Systems vice president. "The seeker test has successfully demonstrated the superior capability and maturity of our seeker technology against a variety of targets that resemble today's threats."

U.S. surface combatants and submarines require a robust, long-range strike capability to defeat emerging mobile threats. Since 2005, Raytheon Missile Systems has invested heavily in seeker technology development for Tomahawk to detect, discriminate and engage moving maritime and land-based targets, in all-weather at significant tactical stand-off range.

In June, 2014, RMS successfully demonstrated seeker components in a similar captive flight test. The December, 2015, captive flight test of the seeker demonstrated Technology Readiness Level 6 (Prototype in Representative Environment) of the seeker components needed to meet the moving land and maritime strike requirements. These improvements enhance the current Tomahawk long-range precision strike/land attack role.

http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2016-01-13-Raytheon-completes-active-seeker-test-for-Tomahawk-cruise-missile?utm_source=social&utm_medium=TWITTER&utm_content=329418354&utm_campaign=tomahawk&Category%20Name=rms&linkId=20342301

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

The TACTOM Modernization:

• Recertification, Navigation Communication Modernization upgrades (NAVCOMMs), designation Block V, for all
• Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST), designation Block Va
• Military Code (M-CODE), for all
• Joint Multiple Effects Warhead System (JMEWS), designation Block Vb

Initial procurement of TACTOM, as well as modification funds executed in FY 2020 and prior. The TACTOM NAVCOMMs upgrades consist of the Integrated Single Box Solution (ISBS) radio, two new antennas and associated cabling, a new mid-body cover, and changes to the aft-body structure and aft-body cover. The ISBS radio is replacing the existing Satellite Data Link Terminal (SDLT); and the new Ultra High Frequency (UHF) antenna is replacing the existing UHF antenna.

A second antenna is beingadded to the missile to accommodate a second frequency band.

The changes to the missile are driven by the obsolescence of the SDLT hardware and the obsolescence of the UHF Demand Assigned Multiple Access (DAMA) communications infrastructure that is being phased out of service.

As part of the Recertification (ACAT II) program, all Block IV TACTOMs will be updated to the modernized Block V configuration with the incorporation of NAVCOMMs kits continuing in FY 2021.

The TACTOM service life for RGM109E and UGM109E Block IV/V Tomahawk cruise missiles is 30 years with a 15 year deployment and recertification cycle. The TACTOM Recertification program includes FY2021 funding associated with the recertification of BLK IV TACTOM Missiles. The yearly recertification profile will limit the missile backlog within the Fleet due to the expiration of life limiting components. There certification contract will have three months of production lead-time prior to missile induction. Recertification activity includes the costs associated with the Raytheon labor, vendor recertification of specific components (i.e. mechanical and electrical components), recertification of the MK 45 submarine capsule, missile consumables, fuze recertification and fuel. Recertification is planned to occur concurrently withinstallation of NAVCOMMs Modernization Kits, which will replace the existing SDLT radio and antenna.

MST is a Rapid Deployment Capability which includes seeker kit hardware,assemblies/subassemblies, packaging and storage. Seeker kit hardware procurement includes the sensors (not one!), nosecone, ULTRA processor, cooling pump and plumbing, bulkhead, power and signal harnesses, power supply, plumbing and electrical chase insulators, telemetry unit, wiring, magnet generator, and alternator voltage control converter. Includes modifying existing missile infrastructure to accept/install seeker kit components and assemblies into a modernized Block V missile.

M-CODE is an ACAT IV, next generation, modernized Global Positioning System (GPS) capability. TACTOM M-CODE kits consist of new Anti-Jam GPS Receiver (AGR) hardware/software and installation of the upgrade kit into TACTOM Block V AURs.

JMEWS is an ACAT III, new warhead for the Block V Tomahawk Cruise Missile. JMEWS will greatly expand the land target set that the Tomahawk missile is capable of defeating, by combining the blast andfragmentation capabilities of the current warhead with a new penetration capability and improved mission planning. JMEWS will also be compliant with Insensitive Munitions requirements which improve safetyduring transportation and storage on land and aboard ships and submarines. JMEWS program includes upgrades to the AUR missile, and requires upgrades to the Tactical Tomahawk Weapons Control System, and Theatre Mission Planning Center programs.

https://www.secnav.navy.mil/fmc/fmb/Documents/21pres/WPN_Book.pdf

 

[seruriermarshal]

Navy completes first delivery of Block V Tomahawk Missile​

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, Patuxent River, Md.
--
The Navy received its first Block V configured Tomahawk missile from Raytheon March 25, paving the way to provide the
fleet with an upgraded warfighting capability.

These first Block V missiles are from the existing Tomahawk Block IV inventory, and have been recertified and modernized for fleet use.

“This is the next big advancement in Tomahawk capability, and a major achievement for the program,” said Capt. Red, program manager for the Tomahawk Weapons System program (PMA-280). “We’re focused now on delivering advanced capability to the fleet by recertifying and modernizing our Block IV inventory, and by contracting production Block V missiles.”

Red spoke at a virtual ceremony March 25 to commemorate the event along with industry leaders. He noted over the last four decades the program has continued to upgrade Tomahawk's capability and this marked the collaboration between Raytheon, supply chains, field activities and the program office.

Raytheon is conducting the mid-life recertification process at its Camden, Arkansas facility. The process replaces life-limited components in Block IV missiles to enable their remaining 15 years of service life, and provides the opportunity for the missiles to receive Block V modernizations. All Block IV missiles will undergo recertification and modernization.

Block V Tomahawk missiles feature a NAV/COMMs upgrade that maintains the capability for In-Flight Target Updates and Improved Navigation. Future Block V capabilities will add to the NAV/COMMs upgrade and include the Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) variant, designated as Block Va; and the Joint Multiple Effects Warhead System (JMEWS), designated as Block Vb.

The guided-missile destroyer USS Chafee (DDG 90) launches a Block V Tomahawk during a missile exercise Nov. 30 off the coast of California. (U.S. Navy photo)

Navy completes first delivery of Block V Tomahawk Missile | NAVAIR

The Navy received its first Block V configured Tomahawk missile from Raytheon March 25, paving the way to provide the fleet with an upgraded warfighting capability. These first Block V missiles are from the existing Tomahawk Block IV inventory, and have been recertified and modernized for fleet...

www.navair.navy.mil

 

[Forest Green]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1701962632331153887

View: https://twitter.com/defense_news/status/1701962632331153887?s=20

 

[Josh_TN]

Did the USN ever give any indication of what sensor(s) the MST uses for terminal guidance? Presumably an EO/IIR seeker, especially given the cooling requirement, but I believe experiments were also done with passive RF seeking as on LRASM.

 

[Forest Green]

MST? I know the Block V used EO/IR terminal and passive RF.

 

[Josh_TN]

MST? I know the Block V used EO/IR terminal and passive RF.

Maritime Strike Tomahawk. Block Va. Do you have a link that mentions RF specifically?

 

[Forest Green]

Maritime Strike Tomahawk. Block Va. Do you have a link that mentions RF specifically?

This suggests active (MMW) and passive for Block IV, not sure about V.

Navy Wants Its Tomahawks to Bust More Bunkers

The Navy is working to make the Tomahawk missile a better bunker buster and allow it to distinguish targets on the move better. U.S. Central Command recently

web.archive.org

Tomahawk (missile family) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d11XhvlImsU

 

[TomS]

This suggests active (MMW) and passive for Block IV, not sure about V.

http://defensetech.org/2014/02/14/navy-wants-its-tomahawks-to-bust-more-bunkers/

Tomahawk (missile family) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d11XhvlImsU

There's something wrong with that defensetech link, at least for me. It instantly redirects to a 404 page on some sort of sports betting website.

But even looking at the text of the link I see it's from 2014. By 2017, when the actual MST development contract was awarded, they were explicitly saying that they had not decided on the final seeker design and that it could include active and/or passive sensors. After that, they went quiet and stopped describing the sensors at all. Nothing since then except speculation based on 2014.

https://news.usni.org/2017/08/16/navy-raytheon-close-finalizing-maritime-strike-tomahawk-missile-deal

 

[Forest Green]

Try link again now.

 

[TomS]

Try link again now.

Yep, that one works.

Back to Tomahawk, there's an intriguing tidbit on Seaforces (https://www.seaforces.org/wpnsys/SURFACE/BGM-109-Tomahawk.htm)

In 2014, Raytheon began testing Block IV improvements to attack sea and moving land targets. The new passive radar seeker will pick up the electromagnetic radar signature of a target and follow it, and actively send out a signal to bounce off potential targets before impact to discriminate its legitimacy before impact. Mounting the multi-mode sensor on the missile's nose would remove fuel space, but company officials believe the Navy would be willing to give up space for the sensor's new technologies.

This is probably just sloppy writing, but it hints at an interesting possibility, using active radar not as a search sensor but just as a target discriminator. Go active for "one ping only" in the endgame to make sure you haven't fallen for a decoy (a patrol ship fitted with emitters simulating an aircraft carrier, for example) but otherwise run quiet with passive radar homing.

 

[Josh_TN]

I would think that an IIR sensor could reliably establish type already, as in NSM or LRASM. I could see an active sensor making a second check if you already had an emitter installed for some other reason and just were retasking it, but it doesn't make sense to spend money and volume just for ID purposes.

There certainly have been test articles that gave the Tomahawk body a passive RF capability like LRASM and there were experiments involving Block IVs being given updates to allow them to hit a moving target (unclear if the EO/IR seeker locks on or if it just navigates by GPS). I wonder if the blk Va / MST might function as the recon element - passively geolocating emitting targets - and blk IV/V simply are walked onto the found targets via satellite instructions, possibly with terminal EO/IR seeker guidance in the last few miles.

We know the tomahawk can hit a moving target pretty much without modifications just using constant updates - what if the MST was just the tracking portion of the strike complex that enables a strike all Tomahawks able to receive updates? The strike might be coordinated by a software agent that prioritized targets and maximized the value of the strike, attacking the most "value" given the expected defenses of individual targets. We know even blk IV could send a signal/picture when it was about to hit a target; the strike software could then reallocate any other missiles going to that target to something else to maximize effect, or alternatively assign more missiles to a particular target if they were being shot down (no position update from missile = intercepted). This would rely on uninterrupted communications between missiles and shore, but it would offload all the data processing and coordination to reusable system that coordinate attacks in realtime on second to second basis. It also would be able to learn from its strikes.

 

[Josh_TN]

Come for the VLS launch, stay for the pigeon knockdown.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgv5ixxgTsQ&feature=player_embedded



I wonder what the target location update rate is? Must be fractional seconds to go after a ship.

For a ship that large moving that slowly as a crossing target, it wouldn't have to be nearly that exact I think. But on the other hand, if you have a course and speed of the target, why not just calculate where the ship is going to be? The firing system would presumably get position and speed updates from the missile - update the intersection of that path with the target as information gets more refined or if target changes velocity. That way if you lose your connection, the missile still does a best guess of where the target will be rather than passing through where it was.

The question to my mind is, how capable is the blk IV or V seeker in terms of acquiring a ship target? The AGM-158 has only a 12° FOV from what I've read, which means the RF guidance or weapon datalink update is essential for hitting a target. The IIR is more for choosing the aim point and confirming identify then search/acquisition. Where as something like NSM or even SLAM-ER actually has a wide angle IIR for acquiring and engaging the target using image recognition.

 

[TomS]

I would think that an IIR sensor could reliably establish type already, as in NSM or LRASM. I could see an active sensor making a second check if you already had an emitter installed for some other reason and just were retasking it, but it doesn't make sense to spend money and volume just for ID purposes.

Possibly in lieu of IIR? The Raytheon MSTR seeker from c. 2014-16 talks about active and passive radar, but no EO/IIR. Of course, just PRH won't answer the mail for mobile land targets, which might not be emitting. But MMW will.

I lean to the idea that the MST seeker is PRH plus a MMW radar for end game, without EO/IIR. There seems to be a push to diversify seeker techniques somewhat, so having MST doing something different from NSM and LRASM would be operationally useful. (Same way that having both the ballistic SM-6 and sea-skimming MST are complementary.)

I don't think that MST as a recon asset is too likely, because area search eats up range really fast. Also, one of the mentioned improvements in MST is changes to the inertial measurement unit to handle terminal maneuvers, so presumably it can do a weave or spiral to avoid CIWS. Since regular Block Vs won't have that, they would be less effective against ship targets with any sort of terminal defenses.

 

[Josh_TN]

I don't think that MST as a recon asset is too likely, because area search eats up range really fast. Also, one of the mentioned improvements in MST is changes to the inertial measurement unit to handle terminal maneuvers, so presumably it can do a weave or spiral to avoid CIWS. Since regular Block Vs won't have that, they would be less effective against ship targets with any sort of terminal defenses.

PRH - Passive Radar Homing?

Passive RF detection/geolocation would work over very long ranges, were the MST so equipped. LRASM uses this as a mid course guidance tool (and supposedly also defense avoidance). If we're just talking about active radar homing then that is more of a terminal homing method and I agree, not particularly useful in terms of an area search for a target that doesn't have an existing track. But something like LRASM's arrangement should allow the missile to be used as an offboard sensor - the video release implies both a LOS datalink and a satellite datalink, and the missile itself geolocating "pop up" air defenses and targets. I would think that means that the target location(s) could be fed back to shore.

 

[TomS]

PRH - Passive Radar Homing?

Yeah, sorry.

Passive RF detection/geolocation would work over very long ranges, were the MST so equipped. LRASM uses this as a mid course guidance tool (and supposedly also defense avoidance). If we're just talking about active radar homing then that is more of a terminal homing method and I agree, not particularly useful in terms of an area search for a target that doesn't have an existing track. But something like LRASM's arrangement should allow the missile to be used as an offboard sensor - the video release implies both a LOS datalink and a satellite datalink, and the missile itself geolocating "pop up" air defenses and targets. I would think that means that the target location(s) could be fed back to shore.

At some point, the goal is for every sensor to be a node in the grid, so sure, that's possible.

 

[CIC-TAO]

Yep, that one works.

Back to Tomahawk, there's an intriguing tidbit on Seaforces (https://www.seaforces.org/wpnsys/SURFACE/BGM-109-Tomahawk.htm)



This is probably just sloppy writing, but it hints at an interesting possibility, using active radar not as a search sensor but just as a target discriminator. Go active for "one ping only" in the endgame to make sure you haven't fallen for a decoy (a patrol ship fitted with emitters simulating an aircraft carrier, for example) but otherwise run quiet with passive radar homing.

I also have a question:
Many sources mention tomahawk Block IV can perform BDA (Battle Damage Assessment), however the Block IV does not appear to have any sensors to capture imagery or video
We know only Blk Va have seeker.

 

[Josh_TN]

I also have a question:
Many sources mention tomahawk Block IV can perform BDA (Battle Damage Assessment), however the Block IV does not appear to have any sensors to capture imagery or video
We know only Blk Va have seeker.

Blk IV has an IIR sensor in the nose that remains covered until the terminal phase. Stormshadow does the same. I’ve not been able to find a picture of the sensor exposed but cutaways depict it.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Why use a long distance / range Tomahawk if your tgt must be in radar range?
Maybe in range of a Stealth UAV?

I think it's so that you can load one kind of Tomahawk and use it for whatever targets you get, either ships or bunkers or whatever.

It also potentially gives the option of sending the Tomahawks around to the far side of a target ship, to complicate defense planning.

 

[Forest Green]

Why use a long distance / range Tomahawk if your tgt must be in radar range?
Maybe in range of a Stealth UAV?

You can send the missile mid-course updates via data link.

 

[Josh_TN]

Why use a long distance / range Tomahawk if your tgt must be in radar range?
Maybe in range of a Stealth UAV?

Stealth UAV, carrier launched aircraft, IUSS acoustic track, satellite surveillance…there are numerous off-board sensors that could provide targets and target updates. The thousand mile range provides a huge amount of stand-off for the launching platform.

As an exercise, pull up a map and draw a thousand mile circle centered on the Taiwan straight. You’ll notice this includes parts of South Korean and Japanese coasts as well as a large amount of the Philippines. Anything inside this circle can fire a tomahawk at a naval target participating in a landing or blockade of Taiwan, and their fire can potentially be stacked together to arrive at the same time. Closer units fire later or alternatively their missiles simply loiter and wait for weapons fired at longer range to close in. That long range also translates into ~2 hours of endurance. A ship under imminent threat might fire off its missiles to a way point where they simply loiter for an hour until the strike coordinator ashore found an appropriate target track to feed them. The firing ship wouldn’t need to survive in this scenario.

 

[Josh_TN]

It’s worth noting that the USMC and Army are adopting tomahawks as well, and that these potentially could be coordinated or handed off to whatever strike organization mechanisms the USN employs, software or human.

 

[zjz]

Entire Navy Tomahawk Missile Arsenal Will Upgrade To Block V - USNI News

The Navy's arsenal of Tomahawk cruise missiles will all become a Block V configuration, with older versions demilitarized, according to the program manager.

news.usni.org

The link above summarises the Block V re-certification program ....

 

[Scott Kenny]

In the first video you can hear voices talking about multiple "units". I think they were "talking around" using the word "bomb". I would guess getting hit by a 2000lb JDAM would be similar to taking a 16 inch battleship shell. The picture below is from the Naval Yard museum in Washington and shows the result of a 16 inch shell impacting a 26 inch thick steel armor plate. That's just the penetration energy of a hardened steel tip at the front end of a 2700 pound projectile. I'm not sure how the terminal velocity compares to an air drop from 20,000 ft.

Consolidated response:

I'd be amazed if even a BLU-109 could do that.

The WW2 Grand Slam and Tallboy bombs could break Mach 1 on the way down, so a properly shaped bomb could definitely reach cannon shell impact velocities if dropped from far enough up.

This suggests active (MMW) and passive for Block IV, not sure about V.

Navy Wants Its Tomahawks to Bust More Bunkers

The Navy is working to make the Tomahawk missile a better bunker buster and allow it to distinguish targets on the move better. U.S. Central Command recently

web.archive.org

Tomahawk (missile family) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d11XhvlImsU

Is that a stealth chine on the nose?!?

 

[Josh_TN]

Is that a stealth chine on the nose?!?

Yes, Blk IV has RCS reduction features.

 

[Forest Green]

Looks like it yes.

 

[zjz]

Is that a stealth chine on the nose?!?

IIRC, the design was to improve hydrodynamic feature to make it better sail through the underwater phase .... I may be wrong though .....